When a news channel HAS to represent an outright lie as "the other side of the political story in America" then no matter what, even if some well meaning anchors try and debunk some of the lies, many viewers will get misinformation presented to them as news as ALL anchors can't be pointing out lies all the time (they won't get these guests on their shows a and it looks rude and weird to be paying people to lie when you are debunking them anyways) and allot of these misinformers are actually PAID by CNN to misinform their viewers (at least, that's how it seems if every lie by every paid shill isn't debunked immediately on air, EVERY-TIME they say it). I think this post provides a good introduction to the pro-lie bias of the CNN news channel with research confirming these statements.
This problem with CNN is perfectly illustrated by the following headline which calls it a "both sides" problem;
CNN's "both sides" problem infects coverage of Trump's anti-Muslim retweets
President Donald Trump’s latest anti-Muslim retweet spree was racist, misleading, and, above all, indefensible.
Somehow CNN didn’t get the memo.
Trump on November 29 retweeted three anti-Muslim videos that were posted by Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader of the far-right, ultranationalist Britain First political organization, who has previously been "charged with causing religiously aggravated harassment.”
Beyond being incredibly racist, these tweets were also highly misleading. Several media outlets fact-checkedthe claims in these videos, determining one of them to be “false” and all three “overlaid with a message meant to be a blunt hammer blow for a cause.” Additionally, civil rights groups pointed out that Trump’s tweets “further inflame” violence and hate aimed at Muslims in a climate when “hate crimes motivated by anti-Muslim bias are at an all-time high.”
Trump's retweets were widely condemned by American and British officials, including Prime Minister Theresa May. However, CNN covered these tweets, as it covers many other issues, through a series of panel discussions comprising talking heads who move the conversation absolutely nowhere. Many of these panels were stacked with a Trump supporter who attempted to defend the president’s atrocious social media posts.
On CNN Newsroom with John Berman and Poppy Harlow, CNN contributor Ben Ferguson stated, “If I would have seen these videos … I would have probably tweeted that out and said to myself, ‘This is something the world needs to see.’”
On CNN Newsroom with Brooke Baldwin, CNN political commentator Andre Bauer claimed the U.S. has gotten “numb to the continual victimization of American people by people that come over to this country to cause us harm” and praised Trump for “continu[ing] to remind us about it.”
On The Lead with Jake Tapper, CNN political commentator and former Trump campaign strategist David Urban dismissed “the notion that somehow we’re radicalizing folks in the rest of the world” through the spread of anti-Muslim propaganda.
On Anderson Cooper 360, panelist James Schultz, who served as White House ethics lawyer under Trump, attempted to defend the president by asserting that “radical Islamic terrorists do bad things.” Schultz claimed, “It’s not the best choice of videos. Without a doubt, they are fake videos. But for you to say [Trump’s] characterizing all Muslims that way, it’s just flat out wrong.”
And on CNN Tonight with Don Lemon, CNN political commentator Ed Martin said the series of tweets was “not a very good move,” but that critics of the tweets were “missing the forest for the trees. No one that looks with a serious eye at Europe doesn’t recognize that there is a problem with Muslim and Islamic fanatics.” Martin contended that Trump’s tweets were helping the problem by “starting a conversation.”
CNN’s “both sides” panel structure assumes that every issue has two valid sides, and that often those sides are best defined along partisan lines. In the case of Trump’s tweets, that is patently false. These tweets are bigoted and misleading, and anyone who says otherwise is not being intellectually or morally honest.
By introducing two sides to this debate, CNN is muddying the truth about these videos. Given that we now live in an age where the president often takes his cues from what he sees on cable news, CNN’s “both sides” strategy is irresponsible and potentially dangerous.
The problem of promoting shills (lies as truths by allowing it on a news channel without immediate debunking of any false statements made) is outlined in this research by mediamatters;
CNN’s voting rights coverage demonstrates its Trump sycophant problem
Over the past year, CNN diluted its coverage of voting issues by stocking its discussion panels with pro-Trump sycophants who consistently lied to prop up the president’s false claims about voter fraud in the 2016 election. CNN’s panelists stood in contrast to the channel’s reporters, who were somewhat more proactive in calling out Trump’s debunked claims of widespread voter fraud and illegal voting.
During (and since) the election, CNN was widely criticized for adding as commentators a roster of Trumployalists, including former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), conservative commentators Scottie Nell Hughes and Kayleigh McEnany, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, and Jeffrey Lord, former White House staffer under then-President Ronald Reagan (Hughes and Lewandowski have since left CNN). Over the past year, these sycophants have used their platform on the network to spew lies about voting and have repeatedly defended Trump’s debunked claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2016 election.
- Lewandowski made 14 false statements about voting during his four appearances on CNN between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, to discuss the topic.
- Lord made 21 false statements about voting during his 13 appearances on CNN between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, to discuss the topic.
- McEnany made 41 false statements about voting during her 11 appearances on CNN between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, to discuss the topic
- Santorum made eight false statements about voting during his one appearance on CNN between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, to discuss the topic.
- Hughes made three false statements about voting during her one appearance on CNN between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, to discuss the topic.
This barrage of lies from CNN’s pro-Trump coalition stands in contrast to the network’s reporters, who made somewhat of an effort to call out Trump’s lies about voting. During the same period, CNN correspondents Jeff Zeleny, Jim Acosta, Dana Bash, and Drew Griffin made a total of 85 true statements about voting and refrained from repeating any of the falsehoods their conservative colleagues pushed.
Ideally, panelists are supposed to engage in a healthy discussion based on a shared set of facts. But CNN’s Trump surrogates prop up lies when they discuss voting, often to defend the president and his alternate reality.rate)
Study: CNN's paid Trump shills made more than 500 appearances over the last three months The network is making a big show of its commitment to facts while paying Trump apologists to lie
“This is an apple,” begins the voice-over for an ad CNN is running as part of its new “Facts First” promotional campaign. “Some people might try to tell you that it’s a banana,” the narration continues. “They might scream banana, banana, banana over and over and over again. They might put banana in ALL CAPS. You might even start to believe that this is a banana. But it’s not. This is an apple.”
The network’s new branding stresses that “there is no alternative to a fact” and that “opinions matter” but “don’t change the facts.”
CNN’s campaign seems driven by the post-truth political environment. President Donald Trump and his administration lie constantly and try to undermine the credibility of other sources of information, including CNN and other media outlets. By confusing the public about what is happening, they hope to maintain power. With top White House aides openly declaring their adherence to “alternative facts,” it makes sense for credible journalists to try to rally around the need for reporting to reflect reality.
But if CNN is truly worried about the sort of people who tell you that an apple is really a banana, the network should deal with the stable of pundits it has hired to provide viewers with knee-jerk defenses of the president. Those Trump apologists -- some of whom were previously on Trump’s payroll -- actively harm CNN’s journalism, frequently bringing panel discussions to a screeching halt with claims so dishonest they approach parody, at times drawing on-air rebukes from the network’s anchors. The pundits force the network to constantly debate whether the apple is really a banana.
In August, media reporter Michael Calderone identified 13 pundits on the CNN payroll “who, to varying degrees, can be identified as pro-Trump”: former Republican Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, talk radio host Ben Ferguson, former Bush White House official Scott Jennings, former South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, former Trump campaign spokesperson Jason Miller, former Trump adviser Stephen Moore, former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), Republican strategist Alice Stewart, former Trump campaign official David Urban, talk radio host John Phillips, former Bush White House staffer Paris Dennard and former U.S. Attorney Matthew Whitaker. Since then, the network has hired Ed Martin, former chair of the Missouri Republican Party, to round out the roster.
As Calderone notes, the pundits are not monolithic, with some even offering criticism for the president from time to time. But on balance, the group reliably tilts discussions, often negatively impacting the ability of viewers to come away from the network’s coverage with a strong grasp of the facts.
Over the past three months, those 14 pundits have made 510 appearances on CNN -- an average of more than five appearances a day -- according to a Media Matters review. Jennings and Ferguson have led the way, with 73 and 69 appearances, respectively. Moore, Kingston, and Stewart round out the top five, each with at least 50 appearances.
CNN has been paying Trump shills to provide on-air commentary since the 2016 presidential campaign, apparently having learned nothing from the disastrous results.
At the time, the network hired pro-Trump pundits like Jeffrey Lord, Corey Lewandowski, and Kayleigh McEnany, claiming that it was important to employ full-time Trump apologists to provide “balance” in its election coverage. Those pundits turned the network’s political coverage into a shit show, with segments devolving to bedlam as the network’s hosts and other contributors tried to push back against a steady stream of lies, talking points, and misdirection. The result may have attracted eyeballs, but it certainly was not a credible news product that distinguished fact from fiction.
And those relationships ended in humiliation for CNN: Lord was fired in August after he directed a Nazi victory salute at my boss; the Republican National Committee hired away McEnany to, among other things, produce propaganda videos; and Lewandowski remained on the Trump payroll while simultaneously working for CNN until he finally quit to monetize his relationship with the president full time.
The network has soldiered on since the election, hiring a phalanx of pro-Trump fabulists to populate its panels of reporters, analysts, and pundits. Not every pro-Trump pundit is as bad as Lord or McEnany -- from time to time, some will even offer criticism of the president. But the willingness of many of them to shill for the president regardless of the truth -- to send discussions into a tailspin by saying an apple is a banana -- flies in the face of the network’s stated “facts first” commitment.
Ferguson, for example, has repeatedly been called out by his CNN colleagues this month for offering nonsensical diversions in discussions of Trump’s attacks on NFL players who protest racial inequality during the National Anthem. And Moore -- who typically appears on the network to lie about Trump-backed health care proposals -- on Monday derailed a CNN panel discussion about then-Fox News host Bill O’Reilly paying a hefty sexual harassment settlement by saying that the real solution is for powerful men to never be alone in a room alone with a woman. Kingston, for his part, last night attempted to make excuses for Trump’s unprecedented falsehoods, saying that “the American perception is that politicians lie” and Trump is no worse than other presidents; the rest of the panel denounced him, with anchor Don Lemon scolding him for “condoning bad behavior.”
When major stories break, such as Trump’s string of indefensible responses to the lethal white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, VA, Trump’s CNN supporters blanket the network’s coverage. That result was a trainwreck, with the president’s shills sidelining discussions with praise for Trump’s response and dismissals of the importance of the rally.
CNN isn’t the first major news outlet to run an advertising campaign geared around its opposition to Trumpian “alternative facts.” The New York Times sold subscriptions earlier this year with similar patter, proclaiming that “the truth is more important now than ever.” But the paper drew controversy almost immediately when it violated that commitment by hiring a climate change denier for a coveted columnist slot.
As I noted at the time, “When you market your paper as an antidote to a worldview that is unmoored from reality, your subscribers will actually expect you to follow through. When you fail to fulfill your promise, those readers will take their money elsewhere.” Now it’s CNN taking on the mantle of bold truth teller. Perhaps the network should start by first examining its own household.
Conclusions:
If lies are passed as fact on the channel by calling it the other side and not debunking any lie "the other side" says, its very hypocritical of it tpo use this add. That said, this add also illustrates a problem with how Democrats do politics (& thus how "news" is presented by corporate media with Democrat and Republican ties);
CNN Facts First
Facts are facts. They aren’t colored by emotion or bias. They are indisputable. There is no alternative to a fact. Facts explain things. What they are, how they happened. Facts are not interpretations. Once facts are established, opinions can be formed. And while opinions matter, they don’t change the facts. That’s why, at CNN, we start with the facts first.
Basically the media fights back with sarcasm. Something comics do. Like I've pointed out before they won't call Gerrymandering, "Rigging an election" or Lobbying, "Bribery" though its the same thing. And there are many examples of this where GOP come out on top because some facts are too ugly for the public, like the fact no one seems to be able to say how many people are estimated to die from a GOP bill ... just the number of "uninsured" is what they will mention (as if there are no effects of this... does not having medicare for all just make it to embarrassing to say how many people die per year because of ALL of our incompetent politicians?). Anyways, GOP had no problem lieing and saying the Dems had death panels built into the healthcare bill... and now the GOP had its death panel and voted to kill people with thier "tax reform" bill and no one is talking about this atrocity. Basically, the left has a problem telling the truth and calling things what they are without downplaying it, and even avoiding it altogether, to appear nice. Its a symbiotic relationship that works for TV ratings and Trump, so I guess we are stuck with it.
Related;
The media fights Trump with snark. @HasanMinhaj reports: https://t.co/HavqlXzRmX pic.twitter.com/pHM8GaLdqU— The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) May 10, 2017
Moments Of Zen...
CNN is more interested in celebrity than news...
GUARDIANS OF THE GALA - CNN GOES THERE 4/27/2015 During the media's celebration at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the night's intended purpose -- highlighting deserving scholarship winners -- is almost forgotten.
SUPPERBAD & GUARDIANS OF THE GALA 4/27/2015 The media lavishly celebrates at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner despite racially charged riots raging in nearby Baltimore.
CNN is also more interested in sensationalism and news...
WRONGNADO - CNN 9/17/2013 Reporting on a mass shooting in Washington, CNN doesn't let a lack of facts get in the way of drawing speculative conclusions.
THIS IS CNN? 4/22/2013 While other networks used a studio anchor to keep Boston bombing coverage from going adrift, CNN instead went with a sandlot football approach.
THE MOST BUSTED NAME IN NEWS 4/17/2013 CNN's exclusive report on an arrest in the Boston Marathon bombing was exclusive because it was completely f**king wrong.
THE CURIOUS CASE OF FLIGHT 370 3/24/2014 A paucity of information surrounding the details of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 leaves CNN searching for creative ways to fill the void.
CNN'S ENDLESS WAIT FOR FLIGHT 370 NEWS 5/1/2014 CNN veers into absurd territory as correspondents brace themselves for an update on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.
Related Facts & Research;
CNN contributor Ed Martin on fellow CNN employees and co-panelists: They're "black racists" and "rabid feminists" Martin: “It was a wild panel, they had two or three people on there who were just rabid feminists, actually racial, racists -- two of the women were racists, they just were racists, black racists, everything that you say is going to be called racist.”
David Frum: CNN's "worst mistake" has been hiring "in-house Trump associates in order to promote Trump falsehoods" Frum: "You need to hear from them as Trump supporters. You don't need to put your own brand on them."
On CNN, Trump supporter downplays Nazi violence in Charlottesville because no one got shot by white supremacists Darrell Scott: "How many people were shot by a white supremacist? How many guns went off? How much gun fired did we hear? I don't think we heard any."
Related:
Previously:
CNN analyst shares fake news story about Denzel Washington attacking Obama and CNN UPDATE: Harry Houck has taken down his Facebook post
CNN has done great reporting on Roy Moore’s extremism, but two network contributors are trying to get him elected CNN's right-wing commentators keep undermining the network's journalists
CNN's David Gergen criticizes opposition research for being funded by oppositionGergen dismisses facts, saying that even though parts of the Trump dossier have proven to be true, it "loses some of its credibility" because it was funded by Democrats
Related:
Previously:
CNN's Ed Martin: Trump's "Pocahontas" comment to World War II Navajo code talkers was "100 percent" appropriate Martin: "I don’t find it offensive I think it’s more fun and effective than anything"
Previously:
CNN's Paris Dennard: Trump has been better than Obama at calling out white supremacists Dennard: "The president has called these people out ... which is something that President Obama did not do after Charleston"
Previously:
CNN Analyst Michael Weiss Hosted Anti-Muslim Rally with Far-Right Hate Queen Pamela GellerFrom Muslim-bashing neocon operative to CNN’s Syria and Russia expert, it’s been a long, strange trip for Weiss.
While CNN DOES promote falsehoods (sometimes challenged sometimes unchallenged) it doesn't mean that its full of bull. It does cover some subjects properly (just not all subjects or complete accuracy with proper words). A few examples of some good work CNN has done - within the limits its allowed to work under - so this post doesn't seem biased.
CNN hosted an astounding and heartbreaking town hall about sexual harassment last night
Burnett calls out Clinton over Weinstein - Hillary Clinton has released a statement condemning Harvey Weinstein after allegations of rape, abuse, and other forms of sexual misconduct against him mount. CNN's Erin Burnett has more.
CNN contributor Ed Martin: Trump's attack on LaVar Ball isn't a "racial thing" because he also attacks Jeff Flake
CNN's Symone Sanders shuts down attempts to question timing of Moore accusationsSanders: "That is dangerous ... I don't want to thear any conversation about 'why now?'"
CNN's Ben Ferguson falsely claims sexual harassment allegations against Justice Clarence Thomas were "debunked"
CNN's Stephen Moore: Democrat in Alabama Senate race "is no saint either" because he supports abortion John Berman: "Except that one is an alleged child molester"
CNN hosts a scientist to explain why Trump’s government agencies banning words is dangerous and anti-science Rush Holt: “This epidemic of neglect of evidence is really serious because if you want policies and regulations that work, they should be based on our best understanding of how things are”
CNN's Christiane Amanpour: Trump's attacks on journalistic credibility are endangering foreign journalists in repressive regimesAmanpour: "We have seen an exponential increase in the harassment, the imprisonment, the assaults of journalists all over the world"
CNN's John Avlon explains why journalists should call out Trump's lies Avlon: "Part of our job is to call a lie a lie and a fact a fact. We need to insist on a fact-based debate.
Charlottesville killing was an act of domestic terrorism
No comments:
Post a Comment